MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3027901360 · doi:10.1097/gme.0000000000001568

Baseline estrogen levels in postmenopausal women participating in the MAP.3 breast cancer chemoprevention trial

2020· article· en· W3027901360 on OpenAlexaff
Harriet Richardson, Vikki Ho, Romain Pasquet, Ravinder Singh, Matthew P. Goetz, Dongsheng Tu, Paul E. Goss, James N. Ingle

Bibliographic record

VenueMenopause The Journal of The North American Menopause Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEstrogen and related hormone effects
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalQueen's University
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineBody mass indexMenopausePercentileInternal medicineEstroneHormone therapyEstrogenHormone replacement therapy (female-to-male)Breast cancerPostmenopausal womenGynecologyEndocrinologyCancerTestosterone (patch)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to quantify baseline estradiol (E2) and estrone (E1) concentrations according to selected patient characteristics in a substudy nested within the MAP.3 chemoprevention trial. METHODS: E2 and E1 levels were measured in 4,068 postmenopausal women using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Distributions were described by age, years since menopause, race, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, and use and duration of hormone therapy using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Multivariable linear regression was also used to identify characteristics associated with estrogen levels. RESULTS: After truncation at the 97.5th percentile, the mean (SD)/median (IQR) values for E2 and E1 were 5.41 (4.67)/4.0 (2.4-6.7) pg/mL and 24.7 (14.1)/21 (15-31) pg/mL, respectively. E2 and E1 were strongly correlated (Pearson correlation [r] = 0.8, P < 0.01). The largest variation in E2 and E1 levels was by BMI; mean E2 and E1 levels were 3.5 and 19.1 pg/mL, respectively for women with BMI less than 25 and 7.5 and 30.6 pg/mL, respectively, for women with BMI greater than 30. E2 and E1 varied by age, BMI, smoking status, and prior hormone therapy in multivariable models (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: There was large interindividual variability observed for E2 and E1 that varied significantly by participant characteristics, but with small absolute differences except in the case of BMI. Although the majority of participant characteristics were independently associated with E1 and E2, together, these factors only explained about 20% of the variation in E1 and E2 levels.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMenopause The Journal of The North American Menopause SocietySame topicEstrogen and related hormone effectsFrench-language works237,207